Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 43 of 43

Thread: Looking at 70-300 lens

  1. #26
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Posts
    1,711

    Default

    I have a Sigma 70-300 (non-IS) that I bought several years ago. I don't use it often but when I do I'm pretty disappointed with the sharpness, but I expect that for a budget lens. Just wondering though if the Tamron you guys are talking about is much better? I googled and found lots of recent reviews of the Tamron but nothing for the Sigma.
    _______________________________
    Facebook
    Website

    Flickr

  2. #27

    Default

    The tamron should be a nice sharp lens, better than the IS canon 70-300 (which isnt at its best at 300) and more like the nikon af-s one I think.

    A good effort by tamron that lens I think.
    Canon 5DmkII, 400L, Canon 17-40L, Canon 24mmf3.5 TS-E, Canon 70-200f2.8L, Tamron 90mm SP AF Di f2.8 Macro, Sigma 50mmf1.4 EX HSM, Nissin Di866 flash, Manfrotto 190xprob & Markins Q3t head, Lee filters, Lowepro Flipside 400AW, Yong Nuo rf 602 triggers.


  3. #28

    Default

    Last nite(stuff from kitchen)

    ISO 1250
    f8
    1/13 sec hand held
    81mm

    Should have used tripod at that shutter speed,I guess the IS(VC tamron)does help,can hear it working thats for sure

    Resized jpeg no PP

    Name:  IMG_4450.JPG
Views: 65
Size:  349.3 KB

  4. #29
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Christchurch
    Posts
    4,649

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rjd View Post
    I keep thinking of swapping the 70-200f2.8L for the 70-300L. Especially now I have the 5d and less 'reach'. Can I give up the 2.8 though? Its a lump to carry round for a lens I dont really use enough.
    Ive been considering this too. I really don't use my 70-200 anywhere near as much as I thought I would. When I do it's always at the long end and quite often with the TC on!
    Canon > 5DIII | 17-40 L | 35 L | 24-105 L | 70-200 f/2.8 IS II L | 100 L | 400 f/2.8 IS II L | 600 EX-RT | 1.4x TC III | 2x TC III

  5. #30

    Default

    I think I prefer the 70-200 range for landscapes on the 5d2 though, I just dont typically need 2.8 for that!
    Canon 5DmkII, 400L, Canon 17-40L, Canon 24mmf3.5 TS-E, Canon 70-200f2.8L, Tamron 90mm SP AF Di f2.8 Macro, Sigma 50mmf1.4 EX HSM, Nissin Di866 flash, Manfrotto 190xprob & Markins Q3t head, Lee filters, Lowepro Flipside 400AW, Yong Nuo rf 602 triggers.


  6. #31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rjd View Post
    I think I prefer the 70-200 range for landscapes on the 5d2 though, I just dont typically need 2.8 for that!
    The Canon 70-300 L is a great price on there sale,only a few dollars more than from PI store

  7. #32
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Christchurch
    Posts
    4,649

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rjd View Post
    I think I prefer the 70-200 range for landscapes on the 5d2 though, I just dont typically need 2.8 for that!
    You wouldn't be losing the range though?
    Canon > 5DIII | 17-40 L | 35 L | 24-105 L | 70-200 f/2.8 IS II L | 100 L | 400 f/2.8 IS II L | 600 EX-RT | 1.4x TC III | 2x TC III

  8. #33
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Christchurch
    Posts
    4,649

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shooter_1 View Post
    The Canon 70-300 L is a great price on there sale,only a few dollars more than from PI store
    What shop/sites are you referring to please?
    Canon > 5DIII | 17-40 L | 35 L | 24-105 L | 70-200 f/2.8 IS II L | 100 L | 400 f/2.8 IS II L | 600 EX-RT | 1.4x TC III | 2x TC III

  9. #34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adam View Post
    You wouldn't be losing the range though?
    yeah its wider at the wide end and a lot shorter at the long end. But I tend to use the long end less for landscapes anyhow.

    70-200 is often a lens I use just because I want to not because its the right lens.
    Canon 5DmkII, 400L, Canon 17-40L, Canon 24mmf3.5 TS-E, Canon 70-200f2.8L, Tamron 90mm SP AF Di f2.8 Macro, Sigma 50mmf1.4 EX HSM, Nissin Di866 flash, Manfrotto 190xprob & Markins Q3t head, Lee filters, Lowepro Flipside 400AW, Yong Nuo rf 602 triggers.


  10. #35
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Christchurch
    Posts
    4,649

    Default

    Ah, you mean you like that range more on the 5d than the 7d. I read it initially as you prefer 70-200 range over 70-300 which made no sense!
    Canon > 5DIII | 17-40 L | 35 L | 24-105 L | 70-200 f/2.8 IS II L | 100 L | 400 f/2.8 IS II L | 600 EX-RT | 1.4x TC III | 2x TC III

  11. #36

    Default

    70-300 gets me the same reach as the 70-200 on a 7d but more width, and IS too lol. Just slower. More compact, and a touch lighter.
    Canon 5DmkII, 400L, Canon 17-40L, Canon 24mmf3.5 TS-E, Canon 70-200f2.8L, Tamron 90mm SP AF Di f2.8 Macro, Sigma 50mmf1.4 EX HSM, Nissin Di866 flash, Manfrotto 190xprob & Markins Q3t head, Lee filters, Lowepro Flipside 400AW, Yong Nuo rf 602 triggers.


  12. #37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adam View Post
    What shop/sites are you referring to please?
    Kodac shop in Hornby mall,dont know how long sale is on for?

  13. #38

    Default

    How much is it on for, 70-300L is $1900 at expert infotech.
    Canon 5DmkII, 400L, Canon 17-40L, Canon 24mmf3.5 TS-E, Canon 70-200f2.8L, Tamron 90mm SP AF Di f2.8 Macro, Sigma 50mmf1.4 EX HSM, Nissin Di866 flash, Manfrotto 190xprob & Markins Q3t head, Lee filters, Lowepro Flipside 400AW, Yong Nuo rf 602 triggers.


  14. #39

    Default

    2K.

  15. #40

    Default

    lincoln Comedy Nite (last night)




    Name:  IMG_44991r1.JPG
Views: 61
Size:  467.1 KB

    Paul Ego

    Name:  IMG_45191r1.JPG
Views: 64
Size:  715.2 KBName:  IMG_45161ar.JPG
Views: 67
Size:  846.6 KB

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    153

    Default

    Apart from the fact that Paul Ego is in the images, they look ok, although hard to tell absolute sharpness when resized and compressed for the web. Ego's head looks a little soft, but is that movement blur on his behalf, or your camera demonstrating good taste?

    But the key thing is - are you pleased with the performance of the lens? Looks like it was fairly dark on stage, yet there is no apparent camera shake/motion blur issues. the image I checked was 1/30th at 175mm on a 60D, so about 280mm effective. Getting a good amount of stabilization there I suspect.

  17. #42

    Default

    With out the IS I would have been stuffed,the full body shot one is 1/13 sec and while its by no means sharp its well outside the IS working range IMO, iso 1600 for all the shots,maybe I should have bumped it up another click or two.
    I had turned the raw files off a few days before for some reason and forgot to turn back on,may have cleaned up alittle better as raws.I'm quite happy with the last shot under the conditions,its quite sharp full size
    They only had 2 flood lights on poles at front corners of stage at 45 deg,because they stood at front of stage they werent in the main light unless stepping back 2-3 meters which they didnt do much.

    Was a great nite,they put on a very entertaining show

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    153

    Default

    A slightly noisy images is better than an image softened by motion blur. There are no options once its softened with motion blur. Careful PP can remove most noise without removing too much detail

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •